During the Battle of Britain, Churchill ordered a bombing attack on Berlin. Consequently, Hitler ordered Göring to switch from attacking military infrastructure to attacking London. This is widely considered to have been a significant strategic mistake that helped the British win the Battle of Britain.

Data centers are now dual use infrastructure and valid war targets

We could also check how many children have been kidnapped by the both sides.

Depending on how you consider escalation, their preference pivot from one-way drones to ballistic missiles can be considered one

https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/ukrainealert/russias-h...

Ruzzians hunt and kill babushkas for sport, sickening

https://meanovia.com/babushka-meaning/

The blog you linked to links to NY Post[0] and it links to "New Voice of Ukraine", whatever it is, but the link leads to the article about Ukrainian journalist and some other women who were not allowed to stay in a bomb shelter in Kiev.

Maybe you can come up with an actual source? If it exists, of course.

[0] https://nypost.com/2025/10/22/world-news/ukrainian-goat-herd...

[1] https://nv.ua/socium/kievpastrans-zhurnalistku-s-rebenkom-py...

content warning, that subr is not for the faint of heart

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atrocity_propaganda

here is one boasting about bombing UN humanitarian convoy https://tgstat.ru/en/channel/@osvedomitell_alex/34456

attacks on civilians https://t.me/habr_bpla

same https://t.me/shock3OA, this one posted famous video murdering civilain on a bicycle https://www.pravda.com.ua/eng/news/2026/08/23/8049952/

this one posts torture videos https://t.me/s/arx_spn

"More"? More than what? I want more than nothing.

The comment I replied to spreads atrocity propaganda from a Russophobic organization, and spreads especially outrageous kind accusation that boils the blood of every decent human.

I want a source for that accusation. It's that simple.

The UN inquiry sums such channels up:

  Russian armed forces have committed murder of civilians as crimes against humanity using drones, concludes the Independent International Commission of Inquiry on Ukraine in a new report. The Commission examined over 300 publicly available videos of attacks and over 600 text posts on Telegram channels and, where possible, identified victims of these attacks. It interviewed 91 persons from the areas affected by drone attacks, including victims, witnesses, local authorities and medical personnel. 

  From July 2024, Russian forces have recurrently killed and injured civilians in an area stretching over more than 100 kilometres along the right bank of the Dnipro River in Kherson Province. The drone attacks have been widespread, systematic and conducted as part of a coordinated state policy, the report said.

  The drone operators used video feeds transmitted in real time by the cameras embedded in the drones, focused on targets that were visibly civilian, and dropped explosives on them. Hundreds of these video feeds have been regularly disseminated on Russian Telegram channels, some of them with thousands of subscribers, displaying the crimes, as well as text posts announcing further attacks. 

  The scale and intensity of the drone attacks against civilians and civilian objects as well as the destruction of houses and basic infrastructure, the targeting of all means of transport, and attacks against emergency and rescue services, have all rendered the affected areas unliveable and left many residents with no other choice than to flee.

  The recurrent drone attacks, the widely disseminated videos showing them, and numerous posts explicitly exhorting the population to leave suggest a coordinated state policy, on the part of the Russian authorities, to force the population of Kherson Province to leave the area. The Commission therefore concludes that Russian armed forces may have committed the crime against humanity of forcible transfer of population.

Sealioning is a type of trolling or harassment that consists of pursuing people with relentless requests for evidence, often tangential or previously addressed, while maintaining a pretense of civility and sincerity ("I'm just trying to have a debate"), and feigning ignorance of the subject matter. It may take the form of "incessant, bad-faith invitations to engage in debate", and has been likened to a denial-of-service attack targeted at human beings.

Zero from Russian side. Orphans were evacuated from the war zone. Some returned to the Ukraine when their relatives were found.[0] The rest is propaganda.

"A total of 31 children from 23 families have been reunited with relatives in Russia, while 145 children from 118 families have been reunited with relatives in Ukraine and third countries through the participation of the Russian children's rights commissioner's office, according to Lvova-Belova. ... Moscow said it has evacuated children from war zones for their safety, and facilitates family reunifications upon request. Ukraine accuses Russia of taking children unlawfully."[1]

[0] https://www.reuters.com/world/more-ukrainian-russian-childre...

[1] https://www.aa.com.tr/en/eurasia/5-children-reunited-in-proc...

"Orphans evacuated from the war zone", OMG, Goebbels would be proud.

I'd need to see an actual evidence there were zero children kidnapped. A clear statement from the Ukrainian side (the one acting with integrity when the aggressor was bombing hospitals or hunting civilians with drones) will be sufficient.

Talk about hilarious.

Get something of this calibre:

- https://www.ohchr.org/en/press-releases/2026/09/un-commissio...

- https://www.ohchr.org/en/press-releases/2025/10/russian-auth...

- https://www.hrw.org/news/2025/05/22/ukraine-escalating-russi...

These are based on the extensive evidence, not propaganda.

Russian genocidal army is extensively targeting civilians and at this point it's not up to the "debate", especially not with the messaging originating at the head of the Ruzzian aggression.

Look, you're going to be paid for your posts no matter why, don't need to make it look silly, kacáp :)))

"kacáp" is an ethnic slur used by Ukrainian nationalists towards Russians.

Using it doesn't add weight to your arguments.

There are rumors about mobilization, but Russia will almost certainly have to if Putin wishes to continue taking land.

They are growing their drone divisions - and Russia cares less about equipping storm troopers. They still have elite units with good kit, but not necessary for most. Russia fights wars differently from the West, they give up land and blood for time. Works better when they are the one being attacked (eg. napoleon, hitler), but likely applies here in a stalemate like situation.

Another point of growth for Russia is the ballistic missiles, for which Ukraine has no good answer at the moment :/ We should really be enabling Ukraine's domestic production of a PAC like interceptor, but Trump will forever dislike Zelenskyy, re: the phone call

All of that would get them... what? Manpower is needed, but nothing would happen with a massed infantry charge except a mass slaughter, no one is doing that on the front anymore. It's all trenches, artillery, drones, infiltration units with high mobility and a low signature. Russia also hasn't magically grown a ton of fuel, vehicles, weapons and logistics so this really would be throwing warm bodies directly into a grave.

The ballistic missile issue is there you're right, but their current production rate is about ~60 per month and while that's awful, it's not going to change any outcomes. If murdering people in Kyiv and taking out grain silos was going to deter Ukraine it would have happened a long time ago. Ukraine seems to be aware that this is an existential issue for them, which makes sense given what the Russians have done and said to express an intention to ethnically cleanse Ukraine.

All of that together, and Ukraine's increasing ability to strike deep within Russia, taking out their refinery capacity, denying their shipping, etc... why would they stop? Russia would only adapt their AD network, EW, re-arm, and then keep going. This *already happened in 2014* so it's hardly hypothetical.

IMO a lot of people here talk a lot about what they know very little about beyond surface-level readings of news articles, all because they're smart enough to code. That's insane.

You might reflect on this with some of the claims you have made here w.r.t. perspectives on Russian capabilities. Western experts like WotR, CSIS, and ISW hold different opinions and warn about common under-estimations

You and I are not informed enough to speculate like this. Presumably the military planners in Ukraine are competent. If they haven't been striking data centers, it's almost certainly because they prioritize other targets. It won't be because they haven't thought of it or are afraid to do so.

One of the first acts of was a destruction of the dam.

"It's a mistake to blindly adopt tit for tat" - what are they going to do, bomb some datacentres or power plants (again)?

I hope Ukraine is going to bring a major inconvenience to Russia before this winter. Otherwise kacaps are going to continue supporting this outrageous aggression.

Tough decisions have to be made and, despite public criticism and posture, every EU leader is secretly hoping USA can broker a peace deal and this all just kind of goes away.

Why would Europe decide anything? Ukraine is a sovereign country, nobody should be making decisions on its behalf!

Especially not about war and its teritory!

Edit: EU countries should give Ukraine part of their territories, to compensate for land stolen by Russia! This way Ukraine becomes part of NATO and EU, everybody wins!

And nothing Ukraine can decide to do on its own.

As for this "going away" like it or not that doesn't work and it isn't going to happen no matter how much people would like to wish it away. Russia taking a break to re-arm and recover isn't the same as "it's over" and frankly that's why Ukraine is stuck fighting the way they are.

You're also missing the value that Western nations get from Ukraine fighting Russia, both in terms of disrupting Russia, and advancing the state of the art of drone warfare, EW, etc without the rest of us having to fight and die for it. The amount of money involved when considered against those factors and the economic reality of an EU-integrated Ukraine makes this entirely sustainable economically.

This is such a defeatist attitude. By that logic North Vietnam would never have recovered South Vietnam.

A lot of things can happen if you just refuse to be defeated. Hannibal killed almost the entire Roman army at Cannae, but the war ended 15 years later with full victory by the Romans.

In 1940, Britain was the only country in Europe fighting Germany. Many had fallen, were neutral or were fighting with the Nazis (Russia, Italy, etc). But in the end Britain won.

For clarity I'm talking proper empire where you send in troops and install a viceroy, not just trading with places which is mostly what China does. The Taiwan thing is a special case of the communist party trying to take the remaining bit of China which has held out for a century.

So, if Ukraine cedes the territory, they have just legitimized the Russian claim to that territory while getting nothing in return. This is why talks have always fallen through up to this point. Russia wants Ukraine, Ukraine does not want to be Russian. There is no middle ground.

However it builds up its military with the aid of partner countries sufficiently to stop Russia.

That's my bet - it gets frozen with some territory lost but with Ukraine able to defend itself a bit like USSR v Finland. I daresay it could still go like USSR v Afganistan too.

And the $100 billion/year military aid can go on indefinitely, because it's only a fraction of the increased military spending due to the war. If the war ends too soon with the terms favoring Russia, Europe would have to spend even more to increase the pace of its remilitarization.

I'm hoping for a peace deal.

Alternatively, people could be reading hollerith's post as "I want Ukraine to do whatever's necessary to make peace with Russia," which is obviously downvote-worthy.

I personally chose to read it as "I want a peace deal that involves Russia G'ing TFO and paying reparations," but he did leave room for other interpretations.

"pretext to gather forces to attack Russia in the future"

For goodness sake Russia is 100% the aggressor in this. If they hadn't started killing the neighbours no one would be hitting them.

The total NATO military budgets are $1.8 tn per year. They could easily chip in $100bn a year indefinitely to defeat their no 1 adversary. There won't always be a Putin fanboy in the White House cutting all funds.

As a taxpayer I'd consider it one of the world's great bargains, shutting down Russian imperialism before they cause even more grief.

its fucked up and while i cheer on The US/Germany/France/Poland etc backing Ukraine, they're all guilty of paricipating in the drawn out decimating of Ukraine.

They can only produce so many weapons a day, and use most of them quickly, while saving a small stockpile for mass strikes.

Strikes on Moscow may be “symbolic”, but from Ukraine’s point of view, it’s better to spend limited resources to hit a lesser defended but still important target first.

It takes time to actually find a target, and then find/take out/exhaust/bypass defenses (which constantly shift). Many drone strikes are basically intended to “feel around” for where defenses are, aren’t, or are light enough to saturate.

Rather than trying to save up expensive large warhead weapons to try and saturate prime targets in a heavily defended areas, Ukraine is slowly picking away at Russia’s air defense assets, weapons production, and logistics. Russia now no longer has enough defense for complete coverage, and is forced to prioritize certain areas for protection. This means Ukraine now has a much easier time hitting still very important targets outside of Moscow. Ukraine and Russia are now sending hundreds of drone strikes every day at each other of various sizes, with occasional bursts reaching into the thousands.

We are now reaching the point where Russia can’t even fully protect Moscow, which is why you see an increasing amount of high profile hits on it.

Target selection is difficult as well. High value targets aren't always easy to identify and sequencing is important. It took Ukraine years to develop the technology and strategy to have consistent success. They were smart about targeting air defense systems early on which has led to a virtuous cycle where successful attacks make future attacks more likely to succeed. Despite the rampant corruption, Russia has plenty of smart people on their side as well and they are constantly adapting and finding effective ways to counter specific tactics.

Moscow is really big and the most secure city in Russia.

If you want to hit "every target" (which would be way over 100 even if we are talking about huge targets) you have to launch like 50k drones at once.

Same for Russia. Except it is harder for them to find anything of great value at this point. Most of big targets are already in ruins. Civilian infrastructure is all that's left (not counting places reorganized for drone production here, as they are harder to find). And destroying civilian infrastructure does not play well with what Russia is trying to sell for the audience.

They sell "we're only targeting military infra" and "we only escalate after unwarranted escalation by Ukraine".

They hit Ukraine's energy grid during literally the coldest days in winter. The audience's reaction? "YES LET THEM FREEZE".

Russia couldn't care less about what they need to sell. They've been hitting civilian infra right and left.

As they should. Russia did not start the war on Ukraine out of some moral imperative, but simply because they wanted to conquer Ukraine. So there is no limit to what they will attack in Ukraine.

And we have seen limits. They toe the line with foreign dignitaries around, and haven’t levelled nuclear plants.

The recent episodes where Trump has begged Ukraine to go easy n Russian has been a darkly amusing development. ‘No cards’ Zelensky must have enjoyed that.

Russia hit these targets from day one, as a priority.

From a Russian or Chinese perspective it is probably seen as a great success.

Iran has an economic disaster on its hands but it’s held on and has the US squealing with the Houthi, oil prices and all the destroyed US bases. That may well be seen as a win by some there.

The point is moot though, as data centers in space is a complete fantasy that will never happen.

ie. people like the German Isar Aerospace Startup, which raised 800 Millions just to get 2 launches done?

No - space is hard.

There is always some ingenious attacker though.

New York probably thought it was safe pre 911.

Sure there are other issues with getting there, cooling, radiation. But for cost of power prices - space has huge advantage.

Also seems a lot of people on far left seem agree we shouldn’t be building them which yields extra support for SpaceX.

- Putin wages an invasion, with the primary goal to occupy territory. This is what they officially say too, bla bla bla Ukraine should give up Donbass etc... bla bla bla.

- At the same time, Putin also wages a genocide. This is in many ways similar to other wars, e. g. Israel expanding and occupying Palestine, just on a large scale Putin commits to his genocidal war ambition here (see the rumours of another wave of upcoming mass mobilization in Russia).

- Unfortunately, and this is an even bigger problem for more people in the future: Putin has no interest and desire, but also no longer any real possibility to end his war. He married the thought of the war to not only his own personal survival but that of imperialistic Russia. I don't really see how negotiations could work now (Trump acting as agent Krasnov won't do anything useful anyway, other than be a spokesperson for Putin - note that Yuri predicted this in the 1980s: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5It1zarINv0) and this means Putin can only escalate further. While many think Putin is insane, I think the path of escalation "makes sense" IF you are willing to use nukes. While the USA meta-jabait trolls ("he won't use nukes"), I am pretty certain that he would. Which then brings us to the biggest question here:

- Why is the EU not already mass-producing nukes for all member states?

It can not continue that terrorists such as Putin continue to threaten europeans with total annihilation. Relying on the USA is a losing strategy; a replacement for NATO is necessary, one that can also include more actors, including Canadians. Either way I do not understand european politicians refusing to build up a nuclear arsenal for all members in the EU. That makes no sense. We all know Russia under Putin will continue to escalate daily. At some point these EU politicians then have to answer why they did not build up nukes. Agent Krasnov will never harm his business partner - he maximizes on his own personal wealth. Worst US president ever but best russian asset.

If Putin wants an exit strategy (I’m not sure he does), he can simply declare that all terrorists were defeated and the “special operation” achieved its goal. Then hold a victory parade and have state media say that Russia won. The Russian public would be so glad the war was over that they wouldn’t care.

I am not sure if you are trolling. Producing nukes takes time, even with advanced industrial economy like EU, it would take a few months to develop and test nukes. And I would not trust country like Hungary with nukes!

Much more effective is to manufacture weapons. Soon EU will double its tank production to 5 dozens a year!

And we can produce several dozens tanks a year! Soon we will even produce air defense missiles!

Look at Saudi Arabia, suddenly they found Uranium deposits just a week ago: https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/saudi-arabia-discove...

You don't have unannounced nuclear powers now because despite what's being propagandized for the last 5 years, the rules base world order functioned, and brought stability, despite it's flaws - it wasn't perfect, but there was an effort to abide by treaties and international law.

It's was the product of WW2, and to some extent, the Cold War.

Just because you have waves of bots saying it was bad, you haven't seen yet anyone saying how the "Multipolar world order" is going to be better.

There's no project other than autocracies surviving by oppressing neighbors freely by decree.

Nuclear threats from Zelensky were one of the reasons Russia invaded Ukraine!

https://raskrinkavanje.ba/en/analysis/ukraine-did-not-try-to...

Recent German, French and Italian elections are a cause for concern too.

Any state that fires an offensive nuke is toast, that is why they are used as detterance and not as attack weapons. MAD is a very real thing. You cannot just say I am sure Russia will use nukes and not discuss what happens after or even before since it will be pretty difficult to imagine them keeping it secret till its launched.

Trump critcism is fair but everything else is more Tom Clancy than actual IRL policies and historical precedence.

edit: there's no difference between launching a conventional cruise missile and one armed with a nuclear warhead. You'll only know after the attack not before.

And Russia hasn’t really had pushback.

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c5ylm3m67n2o

Do you really think the U.S. would attack Russia? Do you think the U.S. would allow the EU to level Russia (which it probably doesn’t have the ability to do)?

As repeatedly stated over the years, it is _not_.

Every nuclear nation plans on winning a nuclear exchange. Of course, what 'winning' means is debatable, but they very much plan to beat the threat and not just bluster about mutual nuclear annihilation.

Both sides are able to perform drone attacks 100s of km beyond their border. Moscow is also enduring drone attacks.

https://youtu.be/N_kBexnffxI?is=1TUDM-WMgr95_zh3

Well, they did, but Trump sorted that out.

Not to mention cruise and ballistic missles. Russia never needed any ground besides its own to attack the city.

similar to https://www.alibaba.com/product-detail/200-kg-Turbojet-Engin...

Pure terrorism.

Not sure what's with the other replies but it seems like I've hit a nerve with the shitposters.

Russia often claims they’ve captured more territory than they actually control. Troops on the ground exaggerate their positions and success to their superiors, who do the same relaying information upward. Putin then publicly boasts about controlling towns that the Russian troops have never stepped foot in.

“It may be dangerous to be America's enemy, but to be America's friend is fatal.” - Henry Kissinger

“Were there not an Israel, the US would have to invent an Israel to protect our interests in the region“ – Joe Biden, 1986

“The Russians are dying. It’s the best money we’ve ever spent.“ – senator of USA

“The goal is to use Afghanistan to wash money out of the tax bases of the US and Europe through Afghanistan and back into the hands of a transnational security elite. The goal is an endless war, not a successful war“ – Julian Assange

“Soon after 9/11, former General Wesley Clark visited the Pentagon and saw plans for regime change in seven countries in five years: "Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan & finishing it off with Iran.“

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Westsplaining

https://theintercept.com/2014/02/24/jtrig-manipulation/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_the_Principles_of_State_Lan...

Sorry, but nothing will change this basic truth: just as an example: remember permitting hate speech on your social networks against Russians, then "retracted" with no visible effect? I do.

Effectively suppressing on your web forums discussions of ukranian "nationalism" (a very soft word to describe it) is another example, but there is much more.